Deriving a 12‐step process to create and implement a comprehensive knowledge management system

Abstract

Purpose Enterprises are supportive of knowledge management (KM) activities if they result in “actionable information” that relates to achieving strategic and operational goals and improved performance. KM individuals and corporate practitioners have evolved multiple approaches to creating the discrete steps required to design, implement and measure knowledge management systems (KMS) that meet the “actionable information” expectation of organizations. However, there is no universally acclaimed standard or best practice readily embraced, the purpose of this article, therefore, is to investigate a process for a comprehensive KMS. Design/methodology/approach This article describes and analyzes five such approaches to an effective KMS; two are derived from academic sources and three from name recognizable practitioner corporations. The five use eight‐, nine‐ and ten‐step constructs for their KMSs. Findings The study found many similarities but were also able to project a 12‐step hybrid approach which combines all the best features of the five analyzed. Furthermore, the 12 steps are then logically distributed among the George Washington University “Four Pillar Framework” promulgated in 2000 and reflecting the four domains of leadership – organization – technology – learning which have consistently shown the capability to encompass all aspects of effective knowledge sharing and collaborative cultures. The 12‐step process is then put through a sensitivity/realism assessment using an actual configuration management application to demonstrate the utility of the process for future uses. Originality/value Ultimately, the various groupings and process steps described also lend themselves to the creation of an analysis and auditing instrument which can be applied to organizational environments to ascertain what exists and what is lacking for an effective KMS.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.